N.M. Stat. » Chapter 69 — Mines
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 69-36-16 (2026)

Judicial review

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. A person who is or may be affected by a rule of the commission may appeal the action of the commission by filing a notice of appeal with the court of appeals within thirty days from the filing date of the rule with the state records center. All appeals of rules shall be taken on the record made at the public hearing on the rule.

B. A party, intervenor or any other person upon a showing of good cause for not appearing at the public hearing on a rule may appeal a decision of the commission adopting, amending or repealing the rule by filing a written notice of appeal with the court of appeals within forty-five days after entry of the commission's decision. Copies of the notice of appeal shall be served at the time of filing, either personally or by certified mail, upon all parties to the proceeding before the commission.

C. A person who is or may be affected by a final action of the commission other than a rule may appeal the action of the commission by filing a notice of appeal with the district court pursuant to the provisions of Section 39-3-1.1 NMSA 1978.

History: Laws 1993, ch. 315, § 16; 1998, ch. 55, § 84; 1999, ch. 265, § 86.

ANNOTATIONS

Cross references. — For procedures governing administrative appeals to the district court, see Rule 1-074 NMRA.

For scope of review of the district court, see Zamora v. Village of Ruidoso Downs, 120 N.M. 778, 907 P.2d 182 (1995).

The 1999 amendment, effective July 1, 1999, substituted "Section 39-3-1.1" for "Section 12-8A-1" in Subsection C.

The 1998 amendment, effective September 1, 1998, substituted "rule" for "regulation" and "rules" for "regulations" throughout the section; rewrote Subsection C; deleted former Subsections D through F relating to procedures on appeal; and made minor stylistic changes throughout the section.

Authority of court of appeals. — Even though the commission had taken no action against miners under the challenged regulations, the court of appeals had the power and authority to review the regulations. Old Abe Co. v. N.M. Mining Comm'n, 1995- NMCA-134, 121 N.M. 83, 908 P.2d 776, 120 N.M. 828, 907 P.2d 1009.

The court of appeals was without authority to review the constitutionality of the New Mexico Mining Act (69-36-1 to 69-36-20 NMSA 1978) in the case of an appeal challenging regulations on their face. Old Abe Co. v. N.M. Mining Comm'n, 1995- NMCA-134, 121 N.M. 83, 908 P.2d 776, 120 N.M. 828, 907 P.2d 1009.

Discretion of commission. — New Mexico mining commission acted within its discretion in ruling that the El Cajete mine was a new mining unit of the Las Conchas mine, rather than a new mining operation; the mines were owned by the same mining company and were substantially interrelated. Rio Grande Chapter of Sierra Club v. N.M. Mining Comm'n, 2003-NMSC-005, 133 N.M. 97, 61 P.3d 806.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1995–2002 · leading case: Rio Grande Chapter of the Sierra Club v. New Mexico Mining Comm'n, 2003-NMSC-005, 61 P.3d 806.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rio Grande Chapter of the Sierra Club v. New Mexico Mining Comm'n, 2003-NMSC-005, 61 P.3d 806. · cites it 20× “[7] Under the amendment to Section 69-36-16 the appeal of an administrative order under the Mining Act is governed by NMSA 1978, Section 39-3-1.”
Old Abe Co. v. New Mexico Mining Comm'n, 908 P.2d 776 (N.M. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 19× “It is apparent from a reading of Section 69-36-16 that the legislature did not intend to confer on this Court the power and the authority to review the Act in an appeal such as this — an appeal challenging the regulations on their face. 9. Additionally, the miners have brought…”
New Mexico Mining Comm'n v. United Nuclear Corp., 2002-NMCA-108, 133 N.M. 8. · cites it 2× “The Mining Commission (the Commission) affirmed the notices of violation, and UNC sought review of the Commission’s order in the district court pursuant to NMSA 1978, § 69-36-16(C) (1999) and Rule 1-074 NMRA 2000.”
Rio Grande Chapter of the Sierra Club v. New Mexico Mining Comm'n, 2001-NMCA-047, 27 P.3d 984. · cites it 2× “See NMSA 1978, § 69-36-16(F) (1993). The Mining Act and Legislative Intent {17} In construing a statute, this Court looks to the plain meaning of the statutory language as well as its purpose, and we assume that the legislative intent is expressed by the ordinary meaning of the…”
Pueblo of Picuris v. New Mexico Energy, Minerals & Nat. Resources Dep't, 2001-NMCA-084, 33 P.3d 916. “See § 69-36-16(0. ' {12} In the case before us, administrative review was available to the Pueblo but, for reasons not apparent from the record-, the Pueblo did not pursue that remedy.”
New Mexico Mining Ass'n v. New Mexico Mining Comm'n, 924 P.2d 741 (N.M. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 4× “On December 4, 1995, the Association appealed the adoption of Rule 205 to this Court in accordance with the provisions of Section 69-36-16. VALIDITY OF APPEAL 5. We first examine a threshold issue involving the validity of the Association’s appeal.”
N.M. Stat. § 69-36-16(A): 1 case
Old Abe Co. v. New Mexico Mining Comm'n, 908 P.2d 776 (N.M. Ct. App. 1995). “It is apparent from a reading of Section 69-36-16 that the legislature did not intend to confer on this Court the power and the authority to review the Act in an appeal such as this — an appeal challenging the regulations on their face. 9. Additionally, the miners have brought…”
N.M. Stat. § 69-36-16(C): 1 case
New Mexico Mining Comm'n v. United Nuclear Corp., 2002-NMCA-108, 133 N.M. 8. “The Mining Commission (the Commission) affirmed the notices of violation, and UNC sought review of the Commission’s order in the district court pursuant to NMSA 1978, § 69-36-16(C) (1999) and Rule 1-074 NMRA 2000.”
N.M. Stat. § 69-36-16(F): 4 cases
Rio Grande Chapter of the Sierra Club v. New Mexico Mining Comm'n, 2003-NMSC-005, 61 P.3d 806. “[7] Under the amendment to Section 69-36-16 the appeal of an administrative order under the Mining Act is governed by NMSA 1978, Section 39-3-1.”
Old Abe Co. v. New Mexico Mining Comm'n, 908 P.2d 776 (N.M. Ct. App. 1995). “It is apparent from a reading of Section 69-36-16 that the legislature did not intend to confer on this Court the power and the authority to review the Act in an appeal such as this — an appeal challenging the regulations on their face. 9. Additionally, the miners have brought…”
Rio Grande Chapter of the Sierra Club v. New Mexico Mining Comm'n, 2001-NMCA-047, 27 P.3d 984. “See NMSA 1978, § 69-36-16(F) (1993). The Mining Act and Legislative Intent {17} In construing a statute, this Court looks to the plain meaning of the statutory language as well as its purpose, and we assume that the legislative intent is expressed by the ordinary meaning of the…”
New Mexico Mining Ass'n v. New Mexico Mining Comm'n, 924 P.2d 741 (N.M. Ct. App. 1996). “On December 4, 1995, the Association appealed the adoption of Rule 205 to this Court in accordance with the provisions of Section 69-36-16. VALIDITY OF APPEAL 5. We first examine a threshold issue involving the validity of the Association’s appeal.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.